Letters to the Editor


Table of Contents Frank B. Finite (a "true" atheist) Where Are They Now? Darwin's Creek Amazing Transitional Animals Ask Miko The Book of Chances Opposable Thumbs Survey SAYS... Your Evological Horrorscope Advertising Supplement Call for Entries The Evolutionary Classifieds Letters to the Editor The Real Story Past Issues Contact the fools - How you ca contact the us	Letters to the Editor Issue 4 Letters Policy: Basically the only thing we have to officially say is this, "Your letter may be directed to another member of the staff, rather than I, the Editor in Chief, answering it. This is done to insure that you get the most highly qualified answer that we can possibly give. Also, sometimes I am on vacation every week or so. And I, the Editor in Chief, reserve the right to edit all letters posted. Sometimes the "colorful" language has to be omitted or changed which would be distinguished by italicized (parenthesis) because it it causes nice elderly church ladies thump their Bibles too hard. And with their fragile and delicate fingers, this causes considerable pain. And since we love and respect them dearly, we choose to save them from such pain so that they can continue to bake us cookies. Your's truly, The Editor in Chief. To: Frank b Finight, (or his brain, as the case may be) Hi. Just wondering what your take on racism would be. Though I don't buy it, since I'm not an atheist, it occurs to me that atheism should support racism. If mankind evolved rather than get created, then it stands to reason that not only would they develop races with differing skin color, facial characteristics, somata types, heights, weights, and propensities for disease, but also differing intelligence, and differing moral propensities. It seems contradictory for an atheist like yourself to believe one without the other. As a Christian, all be it, not a very good one, I am not allowed liberty for such thinking. God created man. All are descended from that same adamic stock, made in the image of God. Even if you're a liberal Christian and believe Adam a myth or allegory, it still teaches the brotherhood of homo sapiens, and thus prohibits racism. In fact, it behoves atheists like yourself to find proof of such racial differences, else concede that there is something miraculous about the commonality of moral aptitude and intelligence given the vast physical differences.. just wondering what your take is on this, beanfarmer Dear farmer o' the bean, You are correct in that there are many atheists who are abhored at the thought of racism, and that such abhoration is contradictory as detailed in your letter. That is why they are not "true" atheists and I am (and, all be it, an excellent one). I'm consistent. There really can't be anything wrong with racism. It is only natural. Now, you will find governments and agencies who say it is wrong, but they have nothing to base their opinion on. And they make the rules because they have the power over others to do so. My opinion, however, is based on the observation of nature (also on the fact that there is no god who makes the rules). Many clans of monkeys (our closest ancestors!) attack other clans just because they are different. Are these clans of monkeys racists? My brain thinks not. If a small yappy dog attacks a larger dog, do you think the small yappy dog a racist? My brain thinks not. If the wind blows over an old oak tree with a yellow ribbon tied around it, do you call the wind racist? My brain thinks not. We are a part of nature - we are the human animal. Why on earth should we be held to a higher standard than that found in nature? Racism is merely nature's way of clearing out the gene pool of defective and weak genes. Opposing racism retards nature's process of elimination which creates overpopulation and helps weak genes get passed on which hampers the evolution of man. Fundies like yourself have a better leg to stand on (being consistent with your ideas, although false ones) in opposition to racism than do my fellow atheists. Sadly, there are not many "true" atheists as myself. I just can't seem to find any. In fact, this month's "Opposable Thumb" is one such pseudo-atheist who wants to pick and choose the parts he likes. And he admits his inconsistency! And this is tantamount to hypocrasy which discredits our (atheists') system of thought! Sincerely, Frank's brain (a chance evolutionary byproduct since the accidental dawning of time, space and matter) P.S. - I loved your coining of the term "adamic stock". I caught your BlindFools website, and thought you might find the following information worthy of study, considering all the Biblical quotes you have posted, let's look at some scientific factors ... personally, I think it take more faith to believe that these 5 facts remained at a steady constant before, during and after the big bang! than it takes faith to believe a Divine Being created us with a purpose, would you like to know what that purpose was? The basic forces of matter and the universe are astounding. They could not have come into existence by accident. There are several basic forces in nature which would destroy the universe-or not let it form-were it not for the delicate balance within each of them. Here is scientific evidence. Evolutionary theory is a myth; creation science is correct. God created everything; the evidence clearly points to it. This is science vs. evolution-a Creation-Evolution Encyclopedia, brought to you by Creation Science Facts. http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/01-ma10.htm Editor's note: The writer posted some info from the site listed above. You can go there if you would like to see it, which I recommend. Dear Robert, Thanks for the great info! What you have demonstrated is called the "anthropic" principle. Some more of this evidence can be found at (http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/510.asp) and (http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/design.html) - although I don't align myself with some of Ross's biblical teachings. But I, the Editor in Chief, believe that the best evidence for a creator is, in fact, a creation. This is so simple and sound that only a scholar applying biased logic can come up with something otherwise. I mean, isn't it silly what skeptics will come up with to avoid the truth of having to submit to their creator?! Thanks and God bless, Editor in Chief P.S. - Oh yeah, our resident atheist Frank would like to have a word with you too. I apologize if he gets a bit too dogmatic. The following is from Frank: Hey Bob, You got it all wrong. The whole universe was created by random chance. And as such, there is NO order within it. Any entity within a system of randomness who can comprehend and reflect on its surroundings will naturally see this randomness as order and subsequently marvel at it. It is merely an optical illusion because you have no real order to compare it against. And if there is no order, there is no design. If there is no design, there is no designer. I call this the anti-thropic principle. Truthfully, Franks B. Finite's brain (a chance evolutionary byproduct since the accidental dawning of time, space and matter)

Contact the fools - How you ca contact the us

Letters to the Editor

Issue 4

Letters Policy:

Basically the only thing we have to officially say is this, "Your letter may be directed to another member of the staff, rather than I, the Editor in Chief, answering it. This is done to insure that you get the most highly qualified answer that we can possibly give.

Also, sometimes I am on vacation every week or so.

And I, the Editor in Chief, reserve the right to edit all letters posted. Sometimes the "colorful" language has to be omitted or changed which would be distinguished by italicized (parenthesis) because it it causes nice elderly church ladies thump their Bibles too hard.

And with their fragile and delicate fingers, this causes considerable pain. And since we love and respect them dearly, we choose to save them from such pain so that they can continue to bake us cookies.

Your's truly,

The Editor in Chief.

To: Frank b Finight,
(or his brain, as the case may be)

Hi. Just wondering what your take on racism would be.

Though I don't buy it, since I'm not an atheist, it occurs to me that atheism should support racism.

If mankind evolved rather than get created, then it stands to reason that not only would they develop races with differing skin color, facial characteristics, somata types, heights, weights, and propensities for disease, but also differing intelligence, and differing moral propensities.

It seems contradictory for an atheist like yourself to believe one without the other.

As a Christian, all be it, not a very good one, I am not allowed liberty for such thinking. God created man. All are descended from that same adamic stock, made in the image of God.

Even if you're a liberal Christian and believe Adam a myth or allegory, it still teaches the brotherhood of homo sapiens, and thus prohibits racism.

In fact, it behoves atheists like yourself to find proof of such racial differences, else concede that there is something miraculous about the commonality of moral aptitude and intelligence given the vast physical differences..

just wondering what your take is on this,

beanfarmer

Dear farmer o' the bean,

You are correct in that there are many atheists who are abhored at the thought of racism, and that such abhoration is contradictory as detailed in your letter.

That is why they are not "true" atheists and I am (and, all be it, an excellent one). I'm consistent. There really can't be anything wrong with racism. It is only natural.

Now, you will find governments and agencies who say it is wrong, but they have nothing to base their opinion on. And they make the rules because they have the power over others to do so.

My opinion, however, is based on the observation of nature (also on the fact that there is no god who makes the rules).

Many clans of monkeys (our closest ancestors!) attack other clans just because they are different. Are these clans of monkeys racists? My brain thinks not.

If a small yappy dog attacks a larger dog, do you think the small yappy dog a racist? My brain thinks not.

If the wind blows over an old oak tree with a yellow ribbon tied around it, do you call the wind racist? My brain thinks not.

We are a part of nature - we are the human animal. Why on earth should we be held to a higher standard than that found in nature?

Racism is merely nature's way of clearing out the gene pool of defective and weak genes. Opposing racism retards nature's process of elimination which creates overpopulation and helps weak genes get passed on which hampers the evolution of man.

Fundies like yourself have a better leg to stand on (being consistent with your ideas, although false ones) in opposition to racism than do my fellow atheists.

Sadly, there are not many "true" atheists as myself. I just can't seem to find any. In fact, this month's "Opposable Thumb" is one such pseudo-atheist who wants to pick and choose the parts he likes. And he admits his inconsistency!

And this is tantamount to hypocrasy which discredits our (atheists') system of thought!

Sincerely,
Frank's brain
(a chance evolutionary byproduct since the accidental dawning of time, space and matter)

P.S. - I loved your coining of the term "adamic stock".

I caught your BlindFools website, and thought you might find the following information worthy of study, considering all the Biblical quotes you have posted, let's look at some scientific factors ...

personally, I think it take more faith to believe that these 5 facts remained at a steady constant before, during and after the big bang! than it takes faith to believe a Divine Being created us with a purpose, would you like to know what that purpose was?

The basic forces of matter and the universe are astounding. They could not have come into existence by accident.

There are several basic forces in nature which would destroy the universe-or not let it form-were it not for the delicate balance within each of them. Here is scientific evidence.

Evolutionary theory is a myth; creation science is correct. God created everything; the evidence clearly points to it. This is science vs. evolution-a Creation-Evolution Encyclopedia, brought to you by Creation Science Facts.

http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/01-ma10.htm

Editor's note: The writer posted some info from the site listed above. You can go there if you would like to see it, which I recommend.

Dear Robert,

Thanks for the great info! What you have demonstrated is called the "anthropic" principle.

Some more of this evidence can be found at (http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/510.asp) and

(http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/design.html) - although I don't align myself with some of Ross's biblical teachings.

But I, the Editor in Chief, believe that the best evidence for a creator is, in fact, a creation. This is so simple and sound that only a scholar applying biased logic can come up with something otherwise.

I mean, isn't it silly what skeptics will come up with to avoid the truth of having to submit to their creator?!

Thanks and God bless,
Editor in Chief

P.S. - Oh yeah, our resident atheist Frank would like to have a word with you too. I apologize if he gets a bit too dogmatic.

The following is from Frank:

Hey Bob,

You got it all wrong. The whole universe was created by random chance. And as such, there is NO order within it.

Any entity within a system of randomness who can comprehend and reflect on its surroundings will naturally see this randomness as order and subsequently marvel at it.

It is merely an optical illusion because you have no real order to compare it against. And if there is no order, there is no design. If there is no design, there is no designer.

I call this the anti-thropic principle.

Truthfully,
Franks B. Finite's brain
(a chance evolutionary byproduct since the accidental dawning of time, space and matter)

Table of Contents

Letters to the Editor

Issue 4